From Jack Rotman... >Richard Fauchaux said: > < snip>
>>In music it is a well-known and commonly observed fact that being a great >>player has absolutely no bearing on ones ability to teach. Conversely, many >>of the best teachers are only mediocre players. A student musician showing >>exceptional talent and ability will generally undertake a quest to find the >>teacher that is both a great player and a great teacher, but until such a >>person is found this student becomes adept at teaching themself. >> >>Why would one expect mathematics to be any different ? >> > >Well, this is an interesting comparison. If we accept it, what does it imply >about mathematics teaching? > >I noticed that Richard said "great player". Does this mean that a minimally >competent player (who can reproduce music without obvious defects) can make a >good teacher?
Very interesting comparison... and one that all of us Math/Music people can understand. (I know I'm not the only Math/Music person out here)
My mother, who was also a Math teacher, tells a story about a teacher she worked with back in the 30s. This person claimed that he could teach any subject. One semester, he taught a swimming class, even though he could not swim a stroke!!!
Now, I'm not proposing to take the arguement that far, I don't think you can teach mathematics without knowing *any* math, but it is my opinion that in the area of K-12 education, being good at TEACHING is at least as important, if not mor important, as being a good mathematician.
It is a definite advantage to be both...
Mark Priniski Pioneering Partner '93 Rib Lake High School email@example.com Rib Lake, WI 54470